Search

Background: the aim of this study is to understand the diagnostic process undertaken by psychiatrists and psychologists regarding adjustment disorder (AD) in their clinical practice and how they differentiate it from major depressive episode (MDE). Methods: A hermeneutic study using grounded theory techniques was carried out. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with twelve psychiatrists and eight psychologists in Colombia, and transcribed verbatim. Initial line-by-line coding was performed, followed by focused and axial coding to construct categories explaining the professionals' reasoning process. Results: The clinical reasoning of professionals regarding AD was understood through four major categories. (1) Difficulty in addressing the experience of stressful events, as there is a risk of pathologizing and medicalizing them. (2) Mental health diagnoses are necessary but not apodictic. (3) The diagnostic category of AD allows for the description of a fluctuating depressive and anxious syndrome occurring in reaction to a stressful event, whose abnormality criteria are based on intersubjective knowledge of the patient's life history and consequential reasoning regarding the need for professional support. (4) The AD label could potentially protect against overdiagnosis of MDE and overuse of antidepressants. Many clinicians in their practice thus subordinate the diagnosis of MDE to ensuring it is not AD, contrary to what is outlined in diagnostic manuals. Conclusion: This study allowed us to understand the clinical reasoning of psychiatrists and psychologists about AD as a diagnosis that inherently indicates the need to work on coping and intervene in the stressor and should be considered as a diagnostic possibility in the same hierarchy as MDE in reactive syndromes, rather than a residual category.